3 ms·

If you’re enjoying the fact that two individuals attempted a person’s car and then beat them up, just because the victim doesn’t agree with your politics, you h

by atonse 1y ago

If you’re enjoying the fact that two individuals attempted a person’s car and then beat them up, just because the victim doesn’t agree with your politics, you have to examine how far your partisanship has gone that you’re cheering for violence against someone who disagrees with you. That’s a bridge too far for me.

King-Aaron 1y ago
This feels like a dog whistle to me.
- atonse 1y ago
  Not really, maybe I'm just too naive, but I don't want our society to devolve where we're enjoying violence inflicted on the "other" even if I absolutely hate what they're doing and how they're doing it (like in the case of a lot of DOGE stuff).
  - assword 1y ago
    [dead]
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> you have to examine how far your partisanship has gone that you’re cheering for violence against someone who disagrees with you Partisan violence was de facto sanctioned by Trump’s January 6th pardons. Coristine, moreover, was directly involved with decisions—almost certainly ones he made outside the cover of law—that cost lives in America and around the world [1]. Finding schadenfreude in a violent person receiving the violence they gleefully meted out to others isn’t toxic. It’s quintessentially human. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-07/musk-s-doge-teen-was-fired-by-cybersecurity-firm-for-leaking-company-secrets?embedded-checkout=true https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-07/musk-s-do...
NoGravitas 1y ago
If said violence actually happened. It's a little too convenient that the "victim" was "Big Balls".
estearum 1y ago
There's a massive gulf between someone merely disagreeing with you and someone taking an active role in (what many people believe to be) deeply evil acts, especially while ignoring the consensus-building mechanism our society uses to determine how taxpayer money is spent (Congressional appropriations). You can dispute the evil of those acts, but it should be clear that many people do find it evil to kill several hundreds of thousands or potentially even millions of innocent people in order to yield $66 per year per average taxpayer in savings. So their feelings about Big Balls' victimization is not mediated by their disagreement with him.
- atonse 1y ago
  Sorry what? Kill several hundreds of thousands or millions of people? What are you even talking about? That screams "Citation Needed" Maybe I missed something.
  - estearum 1y ago
    Here is a running counter of the toll so far: https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=title&order=asc https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=titl... We can reasonably anticipate these programs will be shuttered for at least another year, if not another decade (or permanently). We can argue here or there about the exact numbers, but it's a waste of everyone's time so I just provided a generous range instead. At the end of the day... what exactly do you think the billions of dollars of food and drugs sent to unfathomably poor areas were doing if not keeping a huge number of people alive?
    - atonse 1y ago
      Ok thanks, I will look into this. I may have said in another comment, that I was actually against most of these cuts. Those programs (like PEPFAR). I actually worked with USAID 20 years ago teaching programming classes in Romania and Serbia, and not once did anyone I encountered have a single cynical view on anything. We were all just working hard to "teach a man to fish". So I know that these types of programs play a huge part in showing the world that we actually walk the walk in wanting a better world. I still can't get behind the idea of wishing violence for policy changes. Maybe that's a core principle of mine. It feels anti-American, since we (historically) try to rise above that, even if we often fail. The nature of policy changes at such high levels is that many decisions are going to result in people dying (think of geopolitical decisions, think of Syria, the famine in Sudan right now, etc). And while this administration has definitely been more damaging than the past administrations, my reaction is to argue till our faces are blue whether it was a bad policy decision or not, rather than wish violence.
nosioptar 1y ago
Where did I say anything about enjoying it? Where did I cheer anyone on? All I did was give a short reply and a link to a news source. Maybe you should talk to someone about your persecution fetish?

by atonse 1y ago

King-Aaron 1y ago

This feels like a dog whistle to me.

atonse 1y ago
Not really, maybe I'm just too naive, but I don't want our society to devolve where we're enjoying violence inflicted on the "other" even if I absolutely hate what they're doing and how they're doing it (like in the case of a lot of DOGE stuff).
- assword 1y ago
  [dead]

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> you have to examine how far your partisanship has gone that you’re cheering for violence against someone who disagrees with you Partisan violence was de facto sanctioned by Trump’s January 6th pardons. Coristine, moreover, was directly involved with decisions—almost certainly ones he made outside the cover of law—that cost lives in America and around the world [1]. Finding schadenfreude in a violent person receiving the violence they gleefully meted out to others isn’t toxic. It’s quintessentially human. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-07/musk-s-doge-teen-was-fired-by-cybersecurity-firm-for-leaking-company-secrets?embedded-checkout=true https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-07/musk-s-do...

NoGravitas 1y ago

If said violence actually happened. It's a little too convenient that the "victim" was "Big Balls".

estearum 1y ago

There's a massive gulf between someone merely disagreeing with you and someone taking an active role in (what many people believe to be) deeply evil acts, especially while ignoring the consensus-building mechanism our society uses to determine how taxpayer money is spent (Congressional appropriations). You can dispute the evil of those acts, but it should be clear that many people do find it evil to kill several hundreds of thousands or potentially even millions of innocent people in order to yield $66 per year per average taxpayer in savings. So their feelings about Big Balls' victimization is not mediated by their disagreement with him.

atonse 1y ago
Sorry what? Kill several hundreds of thousands or millions of people? What are you even talking about? That screams "Citation Needed" Maybe I missed something.
- estearum 1y ago
  Here is a running counter of the toll so far: https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=title&order=asc https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=titl... We can reasonably anticipate these programs will be shuttered for at least another year, if not another decade (or permanently). We can argue here or there about the exact numbers, but it's a waste of everyone's time so I just provided a generous range instead. At the end of the day... what exactly do you think the billions of dollars of food and drugs sent to unfathomably poor areas were doing if not keeping a huge number of people alive?
  - atonse 1y ago
    Ok thanks, I will look into this. I may have said in another comment, that I was actually against most of these cuts. Those programs (like PEPFAR). I actually worked with USAID 20 years ago teaching programming classes in Romania and Serbia, and not once did anyone I encountered have a single cynical view on anything. We were all just working hard to "teach a man to fish". So I know that these types of programs play a huge part in showing the world that we actually walk the walk in wanting a better world. I still can't get behind the idea of wishing violence for policy changes. Maybe that's a core principle of mine. It feels anti-American, since we (historically) try to rise above that, even if we often fail. The nature of policy changes at such high levels is that many decisions are going to result in people dying (think of geopolitical decisions, think of Syria, the famine in Sudan right now, etc). And while this administration has definitely been more damaging than the past administrations, my reaction is to argue till our faces are blue whether it was a bad policy decision or not, rather than wish violence.

nosioptar 1y ago

Where did I say anything about enjoying it? Where did I cheer anyone on? All I did was give a short reply and a link to a news source. Maybe you should talk to someone about your persecution fetish?